MNb gave the following:
Quote:

This line was given by John Emms in "Play the Open Games as Black" where he recommended 17...Rd7 for Black with approximately equal chances.  White must be careful to play 17.Qg3 in that particular line or else fall foul of an exchange sac on f3.  White has a couple of alternatives earlier in the line, notably 14.Qf4 which also leads to a dynamically equal position.  It's worth noting also that White should probably avoid 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.Rd1+ Bd7 after which Black may well have a slight edge.

I've had a fair bit of experience with this line, having played the Scotch Gambit quite a lot over the years, which often transposes after 4...Bc5 5.c3 Nf6.  I first spotted the 6.0-0 sideline in Batsford Chess Openings 2 over a decade ago and thought it looked more interesting than the main lines following 6.cxd4.  In my own games I don't recall meeting with the response 6...Nxe4 even once. In particular many opponents continued 6...d6 (?!) 7.cxd4 with a strong centre, while 6...dxc3 allows White decent compensation after either 7.e5 (when Black has to find 7...d5 to get a playable game: 8.exf6 dxc4 9.Qxd8+ Kxd8 10.fxg7 is pretty messy) or 7.Nxc3 intending 8.Bg5.  The latter line was covered very well by Jude Acers in his "Italian Gambit System"- after 7...d6 8.Bg5 Bg4 9.Nd5 Ne5 (Muller and Voigt wrongly assessed this as "=+" in Danish Dynamite) 10.Be2 White can generate enough compensation with a well-timed Nxf6 followed by Bh4, e.g. 10...Bxf3 11.Bxf3 c6 12.Nxf6+ or 10...c6 11.Nxf6+ gxf6 12.Bh4 at once.  After 8...h6 9.Bxf6 (9.Bh4!? was mentioned by Harding in one of his articles) 9...Qxf6 10.Nd5 Qd8 11.b4 Bb6 Acers offers 12.b5!? instead of 12.a4 Bg4, and White should get enough compensation.

It appears that Black has at least as much scope to go wrong here as in the Moller Attack, and possibly more.

Carl Boor wrote on 04/29/10 at 16:11:02:


Which made me conclude that White might have enough compensation without winning prospects. Which again made me conclude that it's premature to state that 9...Ne5 is superior to 9...Bf6.

Carl Boor wrote on 04/29/10 at 16:11:02:

Again premature. In my - and JDKnight's - opinion 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.0-0 leads to dynamic equality.

Carl's response suggested to me a verdict of "Black has an edge but White should be able to draw".  However I am less sure if Black has an edge after 13.Qf4 as above.

1) In the 12.d6 cxd6 "drawing line", after 13.Bg5 Ng6 14.Qd5 Ne5, White has the option of regaining the pawn by force with 15.Nxe5 dxe5 16.Bxf6 Qxf6 17.Qxe5, though the resulting position is drawish.  15.Bf4 is also possible and in most lines White will regain a pawn on d6.

2) After 13.Qf4 Ne8, 14.d6 may be premature, alternatives are 14.Qg3 with ideas of Bh6 and Re1-e3, and 14.Re1 (probably best, taking charge of the e-file), which may give enough compensation.  However, how does White meet 13...Re8 (Fritz 10) taking control of the e-file?   The key idea is 14.Ba3 (probably best) 14...Re4 (breaking the pin) 15.Qg3 Nb5.  Nonetheless White's chances may be a little better than in the 13.Qd3 line- perhaps 16.Bb2 followed by c3-c4 with a powerful bishop along the a1-h8 diagonal.

3) I have no disagreements about about 15.Qd4/15.Qxg6.

Regarding the point about the Moller being dead, in a practical sense I think it's dead at the level one plays at if and only if one sometimes gets unattractive positions out of the opening with it.  Theoretically I agree the answer is still yes, if nothing else because Black has a forced draw in the 13...0-0 main line, though it is not looking quite as bad for White as previously assumed.  The question about White sacrificing a pawn and then trying to draw the ending reminds me of Jeremy Silman's criticism of those who play the Latvian Gambit at a high level as a way of drawing pawn-down endings in the main 4.Nc4 line.

16.Re3 is a neat move order trick that I missed until now. One draw back is that after 16...g4 17.dxe6 f5 we have now transposed to the 16...f5 defense to 16.dxe6 when 17.Rd4 is perhaps stronger than Re3. That being said white might still have good attacking chances after 18.h3. In 1996 informant Nogueiras had this to say about the 16...f5 line.


18. h3 d5 19. Bb3 c6 (19... Qd6 20. Qb5+) 20. hxg4 Qd6 21. Rg3 

(21.Rh3 Rxh3 22. gxh3 fxg4 23. Qxg4 O-O-O {><Bb3, e6}) 

21... f4 22. Rf3 Rh4 23. Rh3 box Rxh3 24. gxh3 O-O-O 25. h4 (25. Qe5 Qxe5 26. Rxe5 Rh8 27. Kg2 Kc7) 25... g6 =+

Thus the current state of affairs with 16...f5 is to play 17.Rd4! showing an edge as analysed by Grimal and Perez in 1999 Informant (sorry I dont have exact volume numbers) and thus the drawback to 16.Re3. With that said it is a nice way to avoid a draw albeit going into a riskier line.

Perhaps White can look to keep the line independant after 16.Re3 g4 but I dont see how being that 16.h3 looks bad simply because of gh and h2+. The fact that black has numerous draws does not mean the line is "bad" or "refuted". But rather that this is an exacting, forcing line and is fun to analyze and play.

I am a little surprised to find that 9...Ne5 has not been featured in any game in the informants that I know of. Considering this was the defense chosen by at least three world champions (Lasker,Spassky and Anand) I find it strange that this move is always given the back seat to 9...Bf6.

Going into the 9...Ne5 line in response to SwJedi's comments I would still say that black has a tangible edge after the following moves...

9... Ne5 10. bxc3 Nxc4 11. Qd4 O-O 12. Qxe4 Nd6 13. Qd3 (13.Qf4!?) Qf6 14. Bg5 Qg6 15.Qxg6

(15. Qd4 b6 16. Rfe1 Bb7 17. c4 Rae8 18. Bf4 (18. Be7 Nf5) 18... Rxe1+ (18... f6 !? {or is it ?!} 19. Bxd6 cxd6 20. a4 Rxe1+ 21. Rxe1 Ba6 

{21... Re8 22. Rxe8+ Qxe8 23. h3 Qe2 24. a5 Qa2 

(24... bxa5 25. Qxa7 Qb2 26. Qb8+ Kf7 27.
Qxd6 Qb1+ 28. Kh2 Qf5 29. Qc7 Ba6 30. g4 Qxf3 31. Qxd7+ Kf8 32. Qd8+ =)

25.axb6 Qb1+ 26. Kh2 Qxb6 27. Qg4 Qd8 (27... Qxf2? 28. Qxd7 +-) 28. Nd4 a5 29. Nf5 Qf8 30. Qg3 a4 31. Nxd6 Qb8 32. h4 Ba6 33. h5 Qc7 34. h6 g6 35. Qf4 Qd8 36. c5
a3 37. Qa4 +- White is not without his chances!}

22. h3 Rc8 23. Qf4 Bxc4 24. Qxd6 Qf7 25. Rc1 Rc5 26. Qb8+ Qf8 27. Qxa7 Bxd5 28. Rxc5 Qxc5 29. Qxd7 Qc6 30. Qg4 Bb3 31. Qf4 Bxa4 32. Qb8+ Kf7
33. Nd4 Qc1+ 34. Kh2 Is there anyway to convert this position ? 


19. Rxe1 Re8 {This simple trading strategy poses the biggest threat as far as I can see.} 20.Rxe8+ 

(20. Bxd6 Rxe1+ 21. Nxe1 Qxd6 -+) 

(20. Qc3 Rxe1+ 21. Qxe1 h6!? 

(21...Kf8 22. Qb4 a5 23. Qb3 Ba6 24. h3 Nxc4 25. Bxc7 b5 (25... Qe4) 26. a4! Qe4
27. axb5 Bb7 28. Bxa5 Nxa5 29. Qa3+ Ke8 30. Qxa5 Qxd5 =) 

22. Bxd6 Qxd6 23.Qe8+ Kh7 24. Qxf7 Ba6 25. Nd2 Qe5 26. Kf1 (26. Qxd7 Bxc4 27. h3 Bxd5 -+) 26...Qd4 =+) 

20... Nxe8 21. h3 Qb1+ 22. Kh2 Qxa2 23. Qe4 Kf8 24. Ng5 f6 25. Nxh7+ Kf7 26. Qf5 Qa4 27. h4 Ba6 28. h5 Bxc4 29. d6 cxd6 30. Qg6+ Ke7 31. Qe4+ Kd8 32. Qa8+ Kc7 33. Qxe8 Bd3 34. Bxd6+ Kxd6 35. Qf8+ Kc7 36. Qxg7 Qf4+ 37. Kg1
Qc1+ 38. Kh2 Bxh7 39. Qxh7 ={Good example of the activity vs. Structure
theme. Perhaps Black has better somewhere}) 

15... fxg6 16. Be7 Rf5 17. Bxd6 cxd6 18. Nd4 Rxd5 19. Rfe1 Kf7 20. Re3 Re5 21. Rae1 Rxe3 22. Rxe3 a6 (22... b6
23. Nb5 d5 24. Nd6+ Kf6 25. Ne8+ $11) 23. c4 b5 24. cxb5 axb5 25. Nxb5 Ra6

(25... Rxa2 26. Nxd6+ Kf6 27. Ne4+ Kf5 28. Nd6+ Kf6 =) 

26. f4 Bb7 27. a4 Kf6 28. g3 unclear/=/-+ ??

{White being able to hold this kind of ending (extra doubled pawn vs. Cutoff king and active Knight) is important for the evaulation of whole 9...Ne5 line.} 

So if you could follow all that I found ways for white to bail into inferior endings with varying degrees of drawing chances. If I had to pick one to play with it would be 15.Qd4 line where both sides have to be careful of the various tactics with the Queens on the board.

Sorry I think I got you confused with someone else with a similar last name that works at Nationwide, first name Pete.

As to answer mnb's 3rd point, after 19...Qe8 the first place I would look is 20.Qe4 probing the kingside and queenside at the same time.


19... Qe8 20. Qe4 g6 

(20... Qc6 21. Qh7 Qxc4 22. Qh8+ Ng8 23. Qh5+-) 

(20...Kg8 21. Qxb7 Qc8 22. Qf3 Rb8 23. Bd3 Qe8 24. b3+=) 

(20... c6 21. Qh7 d5 22.Qh8+ Ng8 23. e7+ +-) 

21. Qxb7 Qc8 22. Qf3 Kg7 +=This is a very important late
middle game position arises in a couple lines. I would argue that white still holds a smalls edge due to his bishop, passed epawn, islolated A pawn, and sligtly weakened black king. However Black has a solid position and can look to slowly get his queenside in order and also try to create counter
play on the h and b lines.

Carl Boor wrote on 04/28/10 at 18:04:53:


You are right that White's attacking chances against the Portisch defense scheme (13...h6) have been underrated for a long time. That has been known for several years already. Tim Harding in his column The Kibitzer has paid some attention to it. Still there are two important points.
1) The fact that Black can force a draw in at least two ways still makes the Greco-Moller unattractive. George Botterill in Open Gambits, 1986, already gave 10...0-0 11.Rxe4 Ne7 12.d6 cxd6 13.Qxd6 Nf5 14.Qd5 Ne7 15.Qd6 (otherwise ...d5) Nf5. Attempts to deviate benefit the opponent.
2) 10...Ne7 11.Rxe4 d6 12.Bg5 Bxg5 13.Nxg5 0-0 14.Nxh7 Bf5 is neither a forced draw nor worse for Black.

3) In addition I am curious how White will proceed after 13...h6 14.Qe2 hxg5 15.Re1 Be6 16.dxe6 f6 17.Re3 Kf8 18.Rh3 Rxh3 19.gxh3 Qe8 and White's invasion has been prevented.

Botterill already pointed out that 9...Ne5 is a good move as well; Heyke/Fette (Theorie der Schach-Eröffnungen XI/1, 1989) were also quite positive. 10.bxc3 Nxc4 11.Qd4 O-O (no need for such an obvious move that has been known for a century) 12.Qxe4 Nd6 13.Qd3 Qf6 (this is the new move as far as I know) 14.Bg5 Qg6 and here White will play 15.Qd4 of course. Sure this line is a serious winning attempt for Black. Still it is not clear to me that White has insufficient play - black square control, while Black's bishop is not exactly active. So the conclusion that 9...Ne5 is far superior to 9...Bf6 is quite premature.

Anyhow I do not see any reason to change my opinion that for gambit players 6.0-0 is much more attractive and the more so on junior level. Just compare 6.0-0 Nxe4 7.cxd4 d5 8.dxc5 dxc4 9.Qe2 Qd3 10.Re1 f5 (Bf5?? loses a piece) 11.Nc3 0-0 12.Nxe4 fxe4 13.Qxe4 Bf5 14.Qh4 Rad8 15.Be3 Qd5 16.Rac1 Bd3 17.Qg3. This is another position with bishops of opposite colours. White is not a pawn down but Black has more active pieces than after that 9...Ne5 line.